Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fetch klib artifacts too #3702

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

alexarchambault
Copy link
Contributor

Quick workaround for #3695

Artifacts should already be filtered by coursier.Artifacts (via
classifiers and artifact types stuff)
@alexarchambault
Copy link
Contributor Author

Includes #3701, opened it to check whether it breaks things on its own

@alexarchambault
Copy link
Contributor Author

alexarchambault commented Oct 9, 2024

The fix here (currently, second commit) should only be temporary. Working on a proper fix, that should be two-fold:

  • Mill should allow users to fetch extra artifact types (sbt does for sure, Maven and Gradle probably do too)
  • coursier should fetch klib artifacts by default, given that these seem pretty widespread in the Kotlin ecosystem

@alexarchambault alexarchambault marked this pull request as ready for review October 9, 2024 15:51
@@ -104,7 +108,7 @@ trait CoursierSupport {
Agg.from(
res.files
.map(os.Path(_))
.filter(path => path.ext == "jar" && resolveFilter(path))
.filter(resolveFilter)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

To preserve previous behavior, you should change the resolveFilter default to contain the path.ext == "jar" match, I guess.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Answered in #3701 (comment)

@lihaoyi
Copy link
Member

lihaoyi commented Oct 10, 2024

Just tried this out, seems to satisfy the manual test described in #3695

@alexarchambault
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing this in favor of #3701 and #3705 (the two PRs are needed to fix #3695)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants